
Athlon 64 4000+

Celeron E1200
Athlon 64 4000+ vs Celeron E1200 Performance Spectrum
About PassMark
PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.
Athlon 64 4000+ vs Celeron E1200 FPS Benchmarks
Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.
Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Valorant

Among Us

Apex Legends

ARC Raiders

Baldur's Gate 3

Call of Duty: Black Ops 6
Athlon 64 4000+ vs Celeron E1200: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict
See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.
Athlon 64 4000+
2001Why buy it
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 1.4 vs 12.5 PassMark/$ ($482 MSRP vs $53 MSRP).
- ❌36.9% higher power demand at 89W vs 65W.
Celeron E1200
2008Why buy it
- ✅Costs $429 less on MSRP ($53 MSRP vs $482 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 796.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 12.5 vs 1.4 PassMark/$ ($53 MSRP vs $482 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 89W, a 24W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (665 vs 675).
Quick Answers
So, is Athlon 64 4000+ better than Celeron E1200?
Which one is better for gaming?
Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Athlon 64 4000+ vs Celeron E1200 Technical Specifications
Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Athlon 64 4000+
The Athlon 64 4000+ is manufactured by AMD. It was released in Janeiro 2001 (24 years ago). It is based on the San Diego (2001−2005) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 2.6 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512K. Built on 130 nm process technology. Socket: 939. Thermal design power (TDP): 89 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 675 points. Launch price was $160.

Celeron E1200
The Celeron E1200 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 20 January 2008 (17 years ago). It is based on the Allendale (2006−2009) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.6 GHz, with boost up to 1.6 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB (total). Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: LGA775. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR1, DDR2, DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 665 points. Launch price was $40.
Processing Power
The Athlon 64 4000+ packs 1 cores / 1 threads, while the Celeron E1200 offers 2 cores / 2 threads — the Celeron E1200 has 1 more core. Boost clocks reach 2.6 GHz on the Athlon 64 4000+ versus 1.6 GHz on the Celeron E1200 — a 47.6% clock advantage for the Athlon 64 4000+. The Athlon 64 4000+ uses the San Diego (2001−2005) architecture (130 nm), while the Celeron E1200 uses Allendale (2006−2009) (65 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon 64 4000+ scores 675 against the Celeron E1200's 665 — a 1.5% lead for the Athlon 64 4000+. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.
| Feature | Athlon 64 4000+ | Celeron E1200 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 1 / 1 | 2 / 2+100% |
| Boost Clock | 2.6 GHz+63% | 1.6 GHz |
| Base Clock | — | 1.6 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 512K | 512 kB (total) |
| Process | 130 nm | 65 nm-50% |
| Architecture | San Diego (2001−2005) | Allendale (2006−2009) |
| PassMark | 675+2% | 665 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | — | 210 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | — | 380 |
Memory & Platform
The Athlon 64 4000+ uses the 939 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Celeron E1200 uses LGA775 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR2-800 memory speed. The Athlon 64 4000+ supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 0 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: AMD AM2 (Athlon 64 4000+) and G31,P35,G41 (Celeron E1200).
| Feature | Athlon 64 4000+ | Celeron E1200 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | 939 | LGA775 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 1.1 | PCIe 1.1 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR2-800 | DDR2-800 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 16 GB+100% | 8 GB |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | No | No |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | 0 |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: not specified (Athlon 64 4000+) / No (Celeron E1200). Primary use case: Celeron E1200 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron E1200 rivals Pentium E2140.
| Feature | Athlon 64 4000+ | Celeron E1200 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| Unlocked | — | No |
| AVX-512 | — | No |
| Virtualization | — | No |
| Target Use | — | Budget |
Value Analysis
At launch, the Athlon 64 4000+ was priced at $482, while the Celeron E1200 came in at $53. On launch pricing ($482 vs $53), Celeron E1200 was $429 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Athlon 64 4000+ delivers 1.4 pts/$ vs 12.5 pts/$ for the Celeron E1200 — making the Celeron E1200 the 159.8% better value option.
| Feature | Athlon 64 4000+ | Celeron E1200 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $482 | $53-89% |
| Performance per Dollar | 1.4 | 12.5+793% |
| Release Date | 2001 | 2008 |
Affiliate Disclosure
ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.
Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
















